Review/Grading list for newbies

[Tyler]

I have an idea. 8O

When I see newbie work on the forum, I so badly want to help. There are things that you begin to see after you've made seeveral pipes that you do not see when you are starting. I see newbie work that is good for what it is, but there are glaring issues that are easy to fix. The question is how do I help? Videos, sure; write ups, sure; discussion board, sure; but the best is hands on critique. (Plus, I am so tired of writing. It is so much easier to talk on the phone for something like this.) My first Chicago show for instance, was the best teacher I ever had. I got my hands on REAL pipes, and I hand REAL makers critique my pipes. I also had LOTS of pipe making discussions. Well, we have discussion here, however limited, but we miss the hands on. This leads to my idea.

What if we developed a sort of grading check list as a way to evaluate pipes? (Hang in there, it gets to hands on.)

Handcut stem? 5 points
Preformed stem? 3 points
Thin, comfortable stem? 5 points
Clunky bit? -5 points
Pass a cleaner? 5 points
Pass with a twist? 2 points
Does not pass? 0 points

etc. etc. (I'm just making stuff up here, but you get the idea.)

The list categories and values would be open for debate, but I think it would serve a useful purpose in two ways:

1. It could be a checklist of details for a newbie to aspire to.

2. It could a bit of a basis for reviewing pipes among ourselves. How? If we assigned a scoring system of some sort, then we would at least have a way to talk about various aspects of a pipe. What a newbie could do was make a pipe, invite a maker that is part of the forum to "grade" his pipe, mail the pipe to the reviewer, and then the checklist would serve as a way for the maker and reviewer to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the pipe. This could be a private thing among the two parties, or the maker could make the discussion public.

Obviously we could already be doing the mailing thing, but the checklist would just be an aid for the reviewer to not forget some aspect to critique.

Speaking of critique, I can hear the naysayers whining about trying to "grade" and a pipe can't be boiled down to numbers, and etc.. However, this is an effort to help us all get better. (Let me tell you, reviewing pipes will often help the reviewer to!) It is not an effort to establish some market norm for pipe quality or value. (Though it might help a newb get an idea on pricing.) It is just a way to cover the bases, and I think it would serve as a good tool for us all.

The challenge will be creating the list. It will take work, and it will be hard to get it out of committee.

So what do you guys think? Anyone want to see something like this? Anyone want to work on it?

Tyler

[bvartist]

Tyler,

I think it would be great. I've even thought about asking some of the more experienced pipe makers if they would be willing to look at my pipes and make suggestions, comments, gripes and complaints. A more in-depth look at things other than a picture or two on here.

Being new at this I don't know how much help I'd be setting things up, but I'd do what I could.

David

[Tyler]

Tyler,

I think it would be great. I've even thought about asking some of the more experienced pipe makers if they would be willing to look at my pipes and make suggestions, comments, gripes and complaints. A more in-depth look at things other than a picture or two on here.

Being new at this I don't know how much help I'd be setting things up, but I'd do what I could.

David

We used to do a lot more critical review on the forum. That was when there were a lot fewer pipes to review, and a lot less public awareness of the board. Now there is some review, but we are mostly just poilte to one another. Not that polite is bad mind you, it just doesn't teach as much if the politeness is rooted in dishonesty (however slight).

It is a VERY helpful process to have a pipe critiqued (REALLY critiqued), but can be uncomfortable. It is really hard to say or hear that a pipe that has lots of blood, sweat, and tears invested in it looks like crap. It becomes even more awkward when that critique is made public record on a forum. I guess what I'm hoping to foster is a way to open the back channels for more honest and helpful review.

Tyler

[alexanderfrese]

Tyler,

you're perfectly right about the politeness. There is use in even direct critique, as long as we all agree on the point, that every critique is only intended to give someone else a helping hand by opening his eyes on details, he alone would otherwise see much later only.
So if we don't stand on all those "I don't like your so’n’so" and instead move on to some "have you tried this’n’that?" everyone would accept a critique like that. :thumb:

Much better beeing stuck with some "Nice pipe, keep up the work" comments, I believe.

Man I was about to throw some jokes at Papa Dukes "Ugliest pipe", since I believe, he knew he had made something running up really high in that ugly contest and might take a bit of irony. Instead I was polite. Hmm. Better – he already knew it was something clumsy so there was no need to stir that pot.

[josh_ford]

I think it is a great idea. That is 0ne of the reasons why I am exited to go to the Chicago show. I doubt I will have any pipes to show to others by then but at least I'll be able to see real pipes (besides Dr. Grabow and corncob, that is).

I am bringing my PITH pipe down to Iwan Ries in the next few days to get some critique there too, hopefully. I would love a lot of really honest critique so I can get started on the right foot instead of going along thinking I'm doing okay.

Great idea Tyler

Josh

[custom300]

Tyler,
I think this is a great idea. Right now, I'm suffering from "analysis/paralysis" because in a lot of ways, I don't know what I'm shooting for. In other words, I've collected all of the tools, made the necessary notes, and even drawn some plans, but I haven't been able to launch yet, because I really don't know what I'm trying to hit. I probably have some sort of OC issues , but a check list would give me (a newbie) some difinitive metrics to shoot for. I know this sounds a little more mathematic than the creative nature that I hope this hobby comes to for me. But I think there are some specifications and minimums that can serve as a target, and then let the creativity begin after that. The pictures serve to help a lot, but having someone, and expert, handle and review my pipes in person would provide some real insight I think.

[alexanderfrese]

As this grading should make kind of a guideline for the newbie, I would suggest to start a little beneath that broadly discussed "to cut or not to cut" line.

There should be some basic attention to:

drilling accuracy
though hard to judge from pics

shank/bowl junction
Easy to step back to early here as a beginner. Very simple to let an otherwise beautiful pipe look unfinished or "beginnerish".

shank/stem junction
Easy to let it make a step, I know…

smoothness of the finish
Also mostly not visible in the pics, so just to keep it in mind…

And some even more difficult point to judge:
flow of the lines/symmetry
This is difficult to some extent, since it comes to personal taste to judge the nuances of this. But I believe even with a pipe I would never buy (because I don't like the overall shape) I could attest some flowing, harmonic lines (or the lack of it). And after all this overall impression gives us the satisfaction we as beginners need to hang on. Looking at the own pipes just to feel "there still is something not looking right" immediately mostly comes from that lack of proportional harmony and symmetry issues.

Since I am not really far on that rocky road, I know in this stage these points are the ones that bug the beginner. So here every kind of critique helps me, and therefore might help other newbies.

[hazmat]

Tyler.. this is a great idea.. but I don't think the scoring system you're suggesting is workable the way you have it laid out. Rather, I'm thinking it should be a 1-to-10 kind of grading scale for the major features of the pipe. Handmade or pre-cut stems should be a known right off the bat and that can be taken into consideration, but I don't think someone should lose any points because of this since alot of "newbies" are not cutting their own stems and really need help along other lines.

For example.

Feature 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Feature 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

etc...

and then, a short "comments" section...

Does that make any sense?


It would give us a way of quickly seeing, from the perspecitve of being the guy(or gal) that made the pipe, the areas in which we're lacking...

[ArtGuy]

It might be cool if we could set up something along the lines of The Gong Show.

[alexanderfrese]

A gong show? Yeah, let us all get some web-cams to get that critique in some on line chat.

But to be serious: I don't think we should spend too much thinking on that meta level of an evaluation system or which scale to use on what detail. We won't come to any conclusion. BTW: I thought we Germans were the ones wanting to judge everything by numbers not after having put everyting neately into place? You know those overorganized quasi-militarical prussian guys lacking any imagination?

I would again like to underline Tyler's intention to get back to some serious constructive critique rather than being to polite. I don't think this has to be laid out in some number scheme.

But we should definitely adress the issues on a pipe set out there to be commented. There may be some blood, sweat and tears in it, and it still may look like crap. It's hard to be honest in such a case, but how should the maker learn anything? Remember: He asked us for our opinions! If we tend to be polite with our words but honest in the meaning, he (or she) will surely be able to take it.

[Tyler]

Tyler.. this is a great idea.. but I don't think the scoring system you're suggesting is workable the way you have it laid out. Rather, I'm thinking it should be a 1-to-10 kind of grading scale for the major features of the pipe. Handmade or pre-cut stems should be a known right off the bat and that can be taken into consideration, but I don't think someone should lose any points because of this since alot of "newbies" are not cutting their own stems and really need help along other lines.

For example.

Feature 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Feature 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

etc...

and then, a short "comments" section...

Does that make any sense?


It would give us a way of quickly seeing, from the perspecitve of being the guy(or gal) that made the pipe, the areas in which we're lacking...

Sure. That method of scoring is probably better. I'm not really trying to propose the details, just get the ball rolling on the idea.

[Tyler]

A gong show? Yeah, let us all get some web-cams to get that critique in some on line chat.

But to be serious: I don't think we should spend too much thinking on that meta level of an evaluation system or which scale to use on what detail. We won't come to any conclusion. BTW: I thought we Germans were the ones wanting to judge everything by numbers not after having put everyting neately into place? You know those overorganized quasi-militarical prussian guys lacking any imagination?

I would again like to underline Tyler's intention to get back to some serious constructive critique rather than being to polite. I don't think this has to be laid out in some number scheme.

But we should definitely adress the issues on a pipe set out there to be commented. There may be some blood, sweat and tears in it, and it still may look like crap. It's hard to be honest in such a case, but how should the maker learn anything? Remember: He asked us for our opinions! If we tend to be polite with our words but honest in the meaning, he (or she) will surely be able to take it.

I agree that a shift back to honest reviews would be good, but I hope this is more than that. The numbers don't have to be involved at all really, but I think of it as a way to get the ball rolling on actual physical reviews. (The picture thing is too hard.) And there is a chance that the number thing COULD be very useful.

One reason that I say "nice pipe" a lot is because that is all I want to type. It is hard enough to communicate about easy things, to communicate accurate something that can be a very emotional thing is much harder yet, and when you then move into decribing how to make the hump just below the stem in the third picture a little smaller it gets rediculous. I am tired of trying. The thing is, I still want to help. So I a proposing a means that I think would be useful.

[Tyler]

When it comes to judging the shape of the pipe, I don't think that is all that hard. I can instantlysee what is wrong with a pipe according to my style and preferences, therefore, if you want my style and preferences they are available. I you like something different, like Roush for example, don't ask me shape questions.

My point is, since the maker is asking someone to review his work, all he needs to do is ask folks who's style he prefers to do the reviewing.

Tyler

[alexanderfrese]

Tyler, I fully understand you being tired of trying the impossible: Making a pipemaker just by helping him within this forum. And I even more appreciate the fact you're still willing to. This attitude probably is a must for a preacher.

But I have the feeling that a numberized scoreboard brings us to far away on that other side. I surely believe that no one can really help with some sort of "I don't know where to start from" paralysis. All techniques are laid out in this forum. You've got your running shoes on, you're on the line for the sprint, but you yourself have to pull the trigger of that starter's gun, or you will never get off that starting block. You won't be the winner in the first run, but you got to get moving! All one can say is "Go on grab some wood and try to make a pipe. Torture it, spoil it, waste your time, curse at it or love it, but show us the outcome of all your efforts.

The problem with those numbers is to achieve a common sense for a 10 or any other given number. So I still suggest that we try to agree on the things to look for in a pipe shown rather than how to judge them.
And to minimize those explaning it ever again pain: If we find some issues, it might be wise to simply link to some ready-made (but then closed after that) thread adressing that issue. This makes it necessary to set up some of these advice-read-only-threads (see my suggestion for a wiki-portion of this wonderful forum here).
So we might then comment a pipe easily. E.g.: Uneven shank/sstem transition, rate it a 6, visit our helpdesk here. Where "here" leads to the thread that lists the do's and dont's and tools and ways to get a smooth transition.

[bvartist]

Although I think this is a great idea, I can see one drawback. Some people might lack the necessary funds to be shipping pipes all over creation for critiqueing. Yet they still should have some access to quality input. In additon to Tyler's idea, maybe we could also have a "members only" area specifically for more critical replies to gallery posts. I know you experienced makers get tired of writing the same thing over and over, but unless there was some sort of apprenticeship program, it really helps out the rest of us. And for some, the only avenue they have to learn.

David

[Tyler]

Although I think this is a great idea, I can see one drawback. Some people might lack the necessary funds to be shipping pipes all over creation for critiqueing. Yet they still should have some access to quality input. In additon to Tyler's idea, maybe we could also have a "members only" area specifically for more critical replies to gallery posts. I know you experienced makers get tired of writing the same thing over and over, but unless there was some sort of apprenticeship program, it really helps out the rest of us. And for some, the only avenue they have to learn.

David

There is a members only area. In fact, there are mulitple such levels. They were created for this very reason. The current criteria are based on your involvement in sales. I think you might be proposing another level of "I'm not a pro, but I want to be in the area where I can get really honest feedback." The problem with that is everyone will want in, and then it is a public area again. There has to be a method of differentiation, and sales is the most obvious because it seems prudent to not have our work judged in from of potential customers that can log in to the board.

Does anyone have a suggestion for how else we might differentiate?

[hazmat]

Tyler.. you're right.. it doesn't have to be numbers at all.. but it could be a scale of some sort that gives the maker of the pipe that's being critiqued some idea as to where they stand on certain aspects as opposed to another. The gist not being to downplay any and all good work being done, but to give the make of the pipe a clue as to the areas they should be paying a bit more attention to.

Dave.. you're correct about not having the funds to be shipping pipes all over creation, but is there some way that, from pictues, a halfway workable critique could work? I know it's tough to really get into it without seeing it for real, but some kind of setup of pictures from all the necessary angles might work.. just thinking out loud here..

[Tyler]

If someone cannot afford shipping, then I suppose he cannot participate. That is sad, but the reality of life. I can't afford a nice huge metal lathe. I wish I could. I cannot, so I don't have one.

In reality though, shipping a pipe will not be more than $10 each way. (I am overestimating assuming lots of insurance.) It amounts then, to a $20 review. That is lots cheaper than going to Chicago or driving to someone's shop.

Tyler

[Tyler]

If numbers don't do it for you, don't use them.

I am trying to suggest a list of things to look for, as much as anything, and if you are a number guy grading on the list might be very helpful.

Being someone who has done a lot of teaching, I have come to realize that folks learn in many different ways. Numbers communicate well to some people (are you feeling me here ScoJo?), while written communication is good for some, hands on for others, and audible communication for others. Some can learn by just reading, and some need to be shown. Some can be told, and some people seem to figure it out all by themselve. We could use a flexible system that can be modified to whatever anyone wants.

I am not trying to propose some mandantory rigid structure. (How could I?) I am trying to suggest that a check list for review criteria might be a useful tool, and I hope that it also facilitates some physical reviews. Could it be used in photos? Sure! Is that ideal? No, but its better than nothing. Ideal would be Bo Nordh having Chonowitsch, Ivarsson, Eltang, and Barbi over for a little private instruction for us all. :thumb: We can't have that. We might not be able to have Chicago. We also might not be able to even mail, in which case photos are better than nothing. I am just trying to suggest that we could take things a step further and try to do some physical critiques for folks.

[bvartist]

There is a members only area. In fact, there are mulitple such levels. They were created for this very reason. The current criteria are based on your involvement in sales. I think you might be proposing another level of "I'm not a pro, but I want to be in the area where I can get really honest feedback." The problem with that is everyone will want in, and then it is a public area again. There has to be a method of differentiation, and sales is the most obvious because it seems prudent to not have our work judged in from of potential customers that can log in to the board.

Does anyone have a suggestion for how else we might differentiate?

We are well aware that there is a members only area, might be private, but we still hear the partying going on in there! 8O

I was thinking more along the lines of keeping "guests" out of the honest feedback area, and it only be for those of us who can show proof we actually make pipes. Kind of a level below the members area now. That way we could possibly get honest opinions without the general public seeing them. It might not be workable, but maybe something to think about.

Another thought would be PM's

One of the broke guys looking for honest opinions :dunno:
David